Legal reasoning and writing skills 2TC

HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF CONSTITUTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

(FOR HLU INTERNAL USE ONLY)

HÀ NỘI - 2022


FACULTY OF CONSTITUTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Program:

Bachelor of Laws/Bachelor of Bussiness law/…

Course title:

Legal reasoning and writing skills

Number of credits:

02

Type of the course:

Optional

1. INFORMATION OF LECTURERS
- Tơ Văn Hồ (Assoc. Prof., PhD.),
- Hoàng Xuân Châu (PhD.),
- Đào Lệ Thu (PhD.),
- Lê Nguyễn Duy Hậu
- Nguyễn Thị Kim Chung

- Mai Thị Mai
- Nguyễn Thu Trang
- Đậu Công Hiệp
- Phạm Minh Trang
Office: Room 501, Building A, Hanoi Law University
No. 87, Nguyễn Chí Thanh Str., Hanoi.
Telephone: 04 38352357
Open hours: 8h00 - 16h00 week-days.
2. PREREQUISITE COURSES
- Constitutional law
- Civil law
- Criminal law
- Administrative law
3. SUMMARY OF THE COURSE
“Legal reasoning and legal writing for legal professionals” is a legal
methodological training course rather than a substantive law course. The
2


course provides the students with knowledge on modern methods of legal
reasoning and writing and trains the students to apply those methods in
legal practice situations. The students will get to work with real cases and
in the context which is intimate to lawyers.
The course is composed of five issues, which focus on three main topics:
- Legal argumentation and fallacies;
- FIRAC as a modern method of legal reasoning;
- CLEO as a method of legal writing.
4. CONTENT OF THE COURSE
Issue 1. Legal argumentation and fallacies
1.1. Introduction to the legal proffessions

1.2. Legal writing and legal professions
1.3. Structure of legal argumentation
1.4. Common fallacies in marking argument
Issue 2. FIRAC as a modern method of legal reasoning
2.1. The fact and the law issue
2.2. Introduction to FIRAC
2.3. The F - Facts
2.4. The I - Issue
2.5. The R – Rules
2.6. The A – Analysys
2.7. The C - Conclusion
Issue No. 3. FIRAC as a method for briefing of a court’s judgment (case
briefing)
3.1. Introduction to case briefing and its usage in legal practice
3.2. The case brief template
3.3. Structure of a court’s judgment (US example)
3.4. Briefing a case
Issue No. 4. FIRAC as a method for lawyers to resolve cases
4.1. Elements of a factual legal case
4.2. FIRAC and analysys of a case
4.3. Types of facts in a case
4.4. How to identify the legal issue of a case
4.5. Sources of law and finding of the law applicable to a case
4.6. Legal analysys – nature and purpose
3


4.7. Analysing a case using FIRAC
Issue No. 5. CLEO as a method of legal writing
5.1. Introducion to CLEO as a legal writing method

5.2. The usage of CLEO in legal practice and in law class
5.3. Example of CLEO application
5. OUTPUT STANDARDS OF THE COURSE AND MEET THE
OUTPUT STANDARDS OF THE TRAINING PROGRAM
5.1. The Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs)
* Knowledges:
K1: Eventhough it is not its prime purpose, after this course, the students
will be able to gain practical knowledge on a certain issues of substantive
law, the legal profession which are touched upon by the cases used during
the course.
* Skills:
S2: Be able to analyse a factual legal case using the modern legal reasoning
method.
S3: Be able to identify applicable law to resolve a case.
S4: Be able to construct persuassive legal argumentation and avoid
common fallacies.
* Self-control ability and self-responsibility:
T5: After this course, the student will be more aware of some ethical rules
of the legal professions, particularly the rule of loyalty to the client, critical
thinking etc.
5.2. The matrix demonstrating the compatibility of the CLOs with the
TPLOs
Learning
outc
ome
s
K1
S2
S3
S4

T5

4

The Knowledge LOs of
the training program
K1

K..

K..

The Skill LOs of the
training program

The ability LOs of the
training program

S..

T..

S..

S..

T..

T..

6. LEARNING OBJECTIVES
6.1. Detailed learning objectives
Obj.
Iss.
Issue 1.
Legal
argume
ntation
and
fallacie
s

Issue 2.
FIRAC
as a
modern
method
of legal
reasoni
ng

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

1A1. Understand the
differences between the

legal professions.
1A2. Understand the role
of argumentation in the
practice
of
legal
professions.
1A3. Understand the
structure of a valid legal
argumentation.
1A4. Know how to avoid
fallacies in making legal
argumentatiaon.
2A1. Understand the
definition
of
legal
reasoning.
2A2. Understand the role
of legal reasoning in
making
legal
argumentation.
2A3. Understand the
contrast between the fact
side and the law side of a
legal case.
2A4. Understand the
composition of FIRAC.
2A4.

the
universal
application
of
legal
reasoning method.

1B1.
Recognize
the
different
components of an
argumentation.
1B2.
Recognize
how the different
components
of
legal
argumentation
work together.

1C1. Apply the
rule of fallacies
in making legal
argumentation.

2B1. Be able to
make
critical

comments on the
unevesiarity of the
legal
reasoning
method.
2B2.
Recognize
how the different
elements
of
FIRAC
work
together.
2B3.
Recognize
how the elements
of FIRAC apply in
specific situations.

2C1. Be able to
identify the fact
and
law
elements in a
practical legal
case.

5

Issue
No. 3.
FIRAC
as a
method
for
briefing
of a
court’s
judgme
nt (case
briefing
)

3A1. Understand the
definition of a court’s
judgment.
3A2. Understand how the
court deliver a judgment.
3A3. Understand the
structure of a modern
court’s judgment.
3A4. Understand the
definition of case briefing
in the Comon Law
Context.
3A5. Understand of the
structure of the case
briefing template.
3A6. Understand the

differences between the
factual analysis and leal
analysis in a court’s
judgment.
Issue 4A1. Understand the
No. 4. definition of the facts and
FIRAC factual context of a legal
as a
case.
method 4A2. Understand the
for
criteria to categorize facts
lawyers of a case.
to
4A3. Understand what
resolve the key facts are.
cases
4A4. Understand what
explaining facts are.
4A5. Understand what
the coincidental facts are.
4A6. Understand the
process of analysing the
6

3B1. Relize the
differences
between different
levels of court’s
adjudication

hiarechy.
3B2. Realize the
legal
argumentation
made
by
the
different
judges
whose judgements
are distributed for
the students to
analyse.

3C1. Apply the
case
briefing
template
to
analyze cases
from different
countries.
3C2. Comments
on
the
differences in
the content of
different
national courts’
judgements

after analysing
them using the
case
briefing
format.

4B1.
Recognize
the
difference
between the 3
different types of
facts.
4B2.
Recognize
the
differences
between
the
sources of law in
the common law
and
civil
law
systems.

4C1. Be able to
comment on the
role of factual
analysys

in
legal profession.
4C2. Be able to
analyze
the
factual elements
of an actual
legal case.
4C3. Be able to
categorize the
facts of an
actual
legal
case.


facts of a case.
4A7. Understand the
definition of a legal
aspect of a legal case.
4A8. Understand the
sources of law in civil
law and common law
countries.
4A9. Understand how to
identify the issue of a
case.
4A10. Understand how to
identify applicable law to
a case.

Issue
No. 5.
CLEO
as a
method
of legal
writing

5A1. Understand the
definition of CLEO.
5A2. Understand the role
of legal writing in legal
profession.
5A3. Understand the
structure of different

5B1.
Recognize
the
differences
between
legal
reasoning
and
legal writing.
5B2.
Recognize
the
differences

4C4. Be able to
identify
the
nature of the
case (the course
of action) after
analysing
the
factual context
of a case.
4C6. Be able to
gather reliable
facts for an
actual
legal
case.
4C7. Be able to
identify
the
issues of actual
legal cases.
4C8. Be able to
identify
applicable law
on an actual
legal case.
4C9. Be able to
make
perssuasive

legal analysis in
an actual legal
case.
5C1. Be able to
apply CLEO to
write a legal
memo in an
actual
legal
case.
7


component of CLEO
method.
5A4. Understand what
the forms of legal writing
are.
5A5. Understand the
defition of legal memo.
5A6. Understand the
usage of legal memo in
different
legal
professions.

between FIRAC
and CLEO.
5B3.
Recognize

the
interrelation
between
legal
reasoning
and
legal writing.

6.2. Total learning objectives
Obj.
Iss.
Issue No. 1
Issue No. 2
Issue No. 3
Issue No. 4
Issue No. 5
Tổng

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Total

4
4
6
10

6

2
3
3
2
3

1
1
2
9
1

7
8
11
21
10

30

13

14

57

7. THE MATRIX DEMONSTRATING THE COMPATIBILITY OF
THE DETAILED LEARNING OBJECTIVES WITH CLOs

Objective
1A1.
1A2.
1A3
1A4
1B1
1B2
1C1
8

Knowledges
K1
X
X

Skills
S2

Ability

S3

S4

T5

X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X


Objective
2A1
2A2
2A3
2A4
2B1
2B2
2B3
2C1
3A1
3A2
3A3
3A4
3A5
3A6
3B1
3B2

3C1
3C2
4A1
4A2
4A3
4A4
4A5
4A6
4A7
4A8
4A9
4A10
4B1

Knowledges
K1
X

Skills
S2

S3

S4

T5

X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

Ability

X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
9


Objective
4B2
4C1
4C2
4C3
4C4
4C5
4C6
4C7
4C8
4C9
5A1
5A2
5A3
5A4
5A5
5A6
5B1
5B2
5B3
5C1

Knowledges

Skills

Ability

K1

S2

S3

S4

T5

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X

X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

8. MATERIALS
8.1. Books
1. William Putman, Legal analysis and writing, 4th edition, Delma
Cengage Learning, 2013.
2. Richard Neumann, Kristen Tiscione, Legal reasoning and legal
writing, 7th edition, Aspen Coursebook Series, Wolters Kluwer, 2013.
3. Kenneth Vandevelde, Thinking like a lawyer – an introduction to
legal reasoning, 2nd edition, Westview Press, 2011.
4. Robin Slocum, Legal resoning, writing, and other lawyering skills,
10

3rd edition, LexisNexis, 2011.
5. Linda Edwards, Legal writing and analysis, 3rd edition, Aspen
Coursebook Series, Wolters Kluwer, 2011.
6. Stephen Elias, Legal research – how to find and understand the law,
16th edition, Nolo, 2012.
8.2. Cases
1.
Motschenbacher, US Court of Appeals, 9th
Circuit, (1974).
2.
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 1963.
3.
Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455, 1942.
4.
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 1967.
5.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347
U.S. 483, 1954.
6.
Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304, 1893.
7.
O’deall v. DeJEAN’s Packing Co., Inc., 1978
OK CIV APP 40, 1978.
8.
Obergefell et al. V. Hodges, Director, Ohio
Department of Health, et al, U.S. 14-556, 2015.
9.
Dudgeon v. The United Kingdom, ECHR,
7525/76, 1981.
10.

Hatzimanolis v. ANI Corporation Ltd, High
Court of Australia, F.C. 92/019, 1992.
11.
Precedent No. 02/2016/AL, Supreme People’s
Court of Vietnam, 2016.
9. TEACHING – LEARNING FORMS
9.1. General schedule
Week

Teaching-learning forms
Group
SelfUnit LectureSeminar
Assessment
work study

1
2

1
2

4
2

3

3

2

4

2
2

3
3

4

2

3

Total

Participation in seminar
Participation in seminar
Mid-term exam
Participation in seminar
11


Team assignment
Participation in seminar
Participation in seminar

4

4

2

4

2

3

5

5

2

4

2

3

Total hours

12

16

10

15

53

Credit hours

12

8

5

5

30

9.2. Detailed schedule
Week 1: Issue 1
Teaching –
Credit
Learning
hours
form

Main contents

- Introduction to the
legal proffessions
- Legal writing and
legal professions
Lecture

4
- Structure of legal
argumentation
- Common fallacies
in marking argument.
Seminar
2
-Different
credi components of legal
t
argumentation.
hour - Identifying common
s
fallacies in legal
argumentation
Team work 1
- Making simple legal
argumentation.
Self study
1

Tutoring

12

Requirements for students’
preparation
- Selected pages from Slocum
(2011), Vandevelde (2011),
Putman (2013), Neumann

(2013).
- Video clips: Noll vs. Neece
case; Meaning of reasoning,
legal reasoning skills; types of
fallacies.
- Discussion on the role of
lawyers.
- Identification of fallacies in
argumentation.

- Discussion on the role of
lawyers.
- Identification of fallacies in
argumentation.
- Content: Answering student’s questions off the class,
introducing new reference materials etc
- Time: 8.30 to 11.00 every Tuesday
- Venue: Room 502, A Building or via email.


Week 2: Issue 2
Teaching –
Credit
Learning
hours
form

Main contents

- The fact and the law issue

- Introduction to FIRAC
- The F - Facts
Lecture
2
- The I - Issue
- The R – Rules
- The A – Analysys
- The C - Conclusion
- Working on some cases to identify the
Seminar
2
fact and the law texts in those cases.
Working on some cases to identify the
Team work 1
fact and the law texts in those cases
Working on some cases to identify the
Self study
1
fact and the law texts in those cases
- Content: Answering student’s questions
introducing new reference materials etc
Tutoring
- Time: 8.30 to 11.00 every Tuesday
- Venue: Room 502, A Building or via email.

Requirements
for students’
preparation
Selected
pages from

Putman
(2013).

Assigned U.S.
and
Vietnamese
cases.

off the class,

Week 3: Issue 3
Teaching –
Credit
Learning
hours
form

Lecture

2

Seminar

2

Main contents

Requirements for
students’ preparation

- Introduction to case briefing and
its usage in legal practice
- The case brief template
- Structure of a court’s judgment
(US example)
Briefing cases using the case
briefing template.

- Selected pages
from Slocum
(2011), Vandevelde
(2011), Edwards
(2011).
- Assigned U.S.
cases.
13


Team
work
Self
study
Tutoring

Briefing cases using the case
briefing template.
Briefing cases using the
1
case briefing template.
- Content: Answering student’s questions off the class,

introducing new reference materials etc
- Time: 8.30 to 11.00 every Tuesday
- Venue: Room 502, A Building or via email.
1

Week 4: Issue 4
Teaching –
Credit
Learning
hours
form

Requirements for
students’
preparation
- Elements of a factual legal case
- Slected pages
- FIRAC and analysys of a case
from Slocum
- Types of facts in a case
(2011), Stephen
How to identify the legal issue Elias (2012),
Lecture
2
of a case
Vandevelde
Sources of law and finding of (2011), Putman
the law applicable to a case
(2013), Neumann
- Legal analysys – nature and (2013).

purpose
Seminar
2
Analysing actual cases using FIRAC Actual
cases
Team work 1
Analysing actual cases using FIRAC asigned in the
Self study
1
Analysing actual cases using FIRAC class.
- Content: Answering student’s questions off the class,
introducing new reference materials etc
Tutoring
- Time: 8.30 to 11.00 every Tuesday
- Venue: Room 502, A Building or via email.
Main contents

Week 5: Issue 5
Teaching –
Credit
Requirements for
Learning
Main contents
hours
students’ preparation
form
Lecture
2
- Introducion to CLEO as a legal - Selected pages from
writing method

Slocum (2011),
14


- The usage of CLEO in legal Putman (2013),
practice and in law class
Neumann (2013),
- Example of CLEO application Edwards (2011).
Using CLEO to write legal Actual cases asigned
Seminar
2
memo from the analysis of cases in the class.
handed out in previous classes.
Using CLEO to write legal
Team work 1
memo from the analysis of cases
handed out in previous classes.
Using CLEO to write legal
Self study
1
memo from the analysis of cases
handed out in previous classes.
- Content: Answering student’s questions off the class,
introducing new reference materials etc
Tutoring
- Time: 8.30 to 11.00 every Tuesday
- Venue: Room 502, A Building or via email.
10. POLICIES OF THE COURSE
- In accordance with the applicable regulations of the Hanoi Law
University.

11. ASSESSMENT METHODS
11.1. Frequent assessment
- Attendance: Students participate in 75% or more of the prescribed hours
for each theory or seminar part.
- Participation in seminars and team assignment.
11.2. Periodical assessment
Forms
Assessing knowledge and attitudes to participate in seminar

Ratio
10%

Individual exam/Group project

30%

Final exam

60%

11.3. Criteria for assessment
15


 Assessing knowledge and attitudes to participate in seminar
- Assessing knowledge: Self-study and understand the lesson (1-7 mark)
- Attitudes to participate in seminar: Not active / Active positive (1-3 mark)
- Total: 10 mark
 Individual exam/paper:
- The students will be given a real foreign court’s judgment. Each of them

shall write a sumary of the facts presented in the case. The sumary shall not
span more than 300 words. The time length of the mid-term exam is 1 hour.
- Criteria to assess the exam/paper:
+ Identifying the material facts concerning a case;
+ Clearness in the language used.
 Final exam
- Condition to participate in the final exam:
+ Students participate in 75% or more of the prescribed hours for each
theory or seminar part.
+ Team assignment or individual exam must be greater than 0.
- Forms of Final exam: Written exam (120 minutes length).
- Content: All issueses given in class and other self-studied issues, including
all learning objectives listed in Section 6 of this Outline.
- Assessment criteria:
+ Showing good understanding of the knowlege learned during the
course;
+ Understandable argumentation;
+ Clearness in the language used.
LEADER OF SUBJECT

16


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Information of lecturers
Prerequisite courses
Summary of the course
Content of the course
Output standards of the course
Learning objectives
The matrix learning objectives with CLOs
Materials
Teaching – learning forms
Policies of the course
Assessment methods

Page
2
2
2
3
4
5
8
10
11
15

15

17